Just
doing his job?
By earning a pink slip for painting his anger across the basketball court
and beyond, Bob Knight made himself a fat target for armchair psychologists.
Like the drill sergeant in high dudgeon in the movie "Full Metal Jacket,"
the coach who's got his undies in a bundle may claim he's just expressing
emotions to do a job -- to fire up the troops.

Psyched
up or p.o.'d?Courtesy Jennifer
Meyers

Perhaps it's appropriate
that drill sergeants scream at their charges -- they are, after all, training
youths to kill. But athletes are being trained to play, not to kill, and
the claim of "doing whatever is necessary" does not convince Steven Edwards,
a professor of sports psychology at Oklahoma State University.

Edwards says Knight
"justifies what he does with players -- that it's all for the sake of
winning games. Anybody in the workplace could say they have this volatile,
mean-spirited approach to work because they are paid to do a job, and
that's what it takes to do the job well. That's a rationalization."

Knight's anger,
he says, "probably comes from something more deep seated than anything
we know... He clearly is an individual who has anger management problems."

While the root
of Knight's anger presumably predates his involvement in sports, sports
may play a role, says Edwards. A connection between sports and his behavior
"may come from the more general phenomenon we see among athletes, especially
elite athletes, when you start very young and you're taught to use aggression
and anger to be successful in sport. Occasionally people use that same
strategy in other aspects of their lives."

Paid
to push and shove
In some cases, Edwards says, when an athlete "encounters conflict in a
personal relationship, the first strategy they employ is intimidation.
It's rewarded out on the field, they make millions of dollars, it's not
surprising they use the same strategy in other aspects of their lives."

Edwards is in the
process of researching the possible connection between long-term participation
in what he calls the "very aggressive sports" of hockey and football,
and the use of aggression and intimidation in daily life.

Even though athletes
can act aggressively without feeling anger, aggression is so critical
to football and hockey that some coaches fear that reducing anger will
reduce aggression. "There's a notion among some coaches that aggression
is a fundamental part of an athlete's personality and ability," says Edwards,
"and that we have to be careful what we do with them. Some coaches feel
if there's an anger problem, it may be better to ignore it."

Parents
and coaches
It's not just coaches and players who act aggressively after getting hot
under the collar -- parents are also getting their knickers in a twist.
"We have seen an increase in the number of reports called in by members,
or media reporting on events," says Still of the referee's association.
"The tenor of the type of assault has changed. Verbal assaults have become
more threatening, and the acts of violence have become more physical.
Parents are assaulting officials during the game and in parking lots after
the game."

The
fact that parents take games so seriously leads to a second problem, Still
says. "When players aren't performing to their ability, it frustrates
us as fans because we are those players in those uniform, we
get the feeling this is my team, so when things go wrong it's
easy to point a finger at officials."

As Still points
out, the very word "fan" probably is short for "fanatic." -- a fact that
is obvious to anyone who's watched the mayhem at soccer games in Europe
or Latin America. Getting back on track, the parental message -- that
losses reflect referee bungling -- allows kids and parents alike to escape
responsibility for their actions, Still argues. "When I played Little
League, I could not hit a curve ball, so my dad took me to the batting
cage and taught me. Today parents don't seem to want to take that time
with their children, it's easier to say the ump sucks."

Up
on sports?A
very different picture of sport emerges from research by Russell Pate,
an exercise physiologist at the University of South Carolina. Using data
designed to represent the U.S. population, Pate found that high-schoolers
who participate in team sports were less likely to smoke, have sex, do
drugs or carry weapons.

Alcohol use, however,
did not vary between athletes and non-athletes.

The study found
these positive correlations, Pate says (see "Study Links... " in the bibliography).

Sports
was consistently linked with a better diet in terms of eating more fruits
and vegies.

Use
of tobacco and illegal substances was less common among sporting youth.

The study shows
a correlation, not a cause-and-effect relationship. Why might athletics
be so helpful? Perhaps coaches or parents stress healthy behavior. Perhaps
practices and games soak up free time that could be spent on illicit or
unhealthy behavior. Perhaps basically healthy kids tend to take up sports
to begin with.